This study reports evidence that concentrated 3‐firm supply chains achieve superior financial performance, and that supply chains’ financial performance varies systematically with measures of chain concentration and chain duration. Results from firm‐level analyses suggest that the profitability benefits of supply chain relationships are captured predominantly by downstream chain members, whereas cash cycle benefits are realized throughout the supply chain. Firm‐level tests also reveal that chain members’ financial performance varies systematically with measures of downstream bargaining power, downstream relationship duration, and degree of supply consolidation. The study's chain‐ and firm‐level analyses employ data extracted from sample firms’ publicly available financial reports, including their major customer disclosures under Statement of Financial Accounting Standards Nos. 131 (1997) and 14 (1976).

This study examines supply chain power in the context of real earnings management (REM), instances in which executives execute (or forego) operations transactions for the sole purpose of meeting or beating earnings targets. We examine whether powerful major customers in supply chains exploit their positions to engage in REM to a greater degree than less powerful firms. We also examine (1) whether the stock market reacts differently to major customers’ and nonmajor customers’ REM, (2) whether any difference exists between major customers’ and nonmajor customers’ post‐REM financial performance, and (3) how suppliers are impacted by their major customers’ REM behavior. Results suggest that major customers exploit their supply chain power to engage in more REM. In contrast to the skeptical stock market reaction when other firms engage in REM, we find no evidence that major customers’ earnings are discounted when there is evidence of REM. Instead, the market appears to interpret major customers’ behavior as “legitimate” uses of power in supply chain management, rather than REM typically considered to be value‐destroying. Further, we find that in post‐REM periods, major customers that engage in REM exhibit better operating cash flow performance than nonmajor customers who do so. These findings suggest that the consequential costs of REM are lower for major customers than for nonmajor customers. Finally, we report evidence that the particular form of major customers’ REM appears to determine the impact on their suppliers. Suppliers’ financial performance deteriorates when major customers’ REM entails discretionary expense cuts. These findings offer new insights into the benefits and uses of power in supply chain relationships, in a previously unexplored context. We discuss the implications of the findings for future research.

No abstract

Whistleblowing reports, if properly investigated, facilitate the early detection of fraud. Although critical, investigation-related decisions represent a relatively underexplored component of the whistleblowing process. Investigators are responsible for initially deciding whether to follow-up on reports alleging fraud. We report the results of an experimental study examining the follow-up intentions of highly experienced healthcare investigators. Participants, in the role of an insurance investigator, are asked to review a whistleblowing report alleging billing fraud occurring at a medical provider. Thus, participants are serving as external investigators. In a between-participant design, we manipulate the report type and whether the caller previously confronted the wrongdoer. We find that compared to an anonymous report, a non-anonymous report is perceived as more credible and follow-up intentions stronger. We also find that perceived credibility fully mediates the relationship between report type and follow-up intentions. Previous confrontation is not significantly associated with either perceived credibility or follow-up intentions.